[Digikam-users] Re: Rating based on quality or content? Ideas, comments?

[JD Rogers]

To the OP: great topic here! I have the same goals (uniform rating
across years of albums) and same problems (my photography skills
improve and quantity goes up, changing the thresholds). I have a rare
shot of a pygmy owl in the wild that may be the only picture I ever
get of said creature in my lifetime, but it's camera-shake blurred
with poor light. Then I have a stunning picture with beautiful vivid
color of an.. ugh.. robin. How to rate these? :-)

> One could then create unions and/or cuts of different ratings, i.e. as
> my preference would be simply content and quality something like:
>
> quality
>
>      | Show-off        Lucky/Great
>      |   photos          shots
>      |
>      |
>      |
>      |
>      | Awful          Memorable
>      | shots           shots
>      +------------------------
>                                content
>
> E.g. lower left are candidates for the bin, upper right will go in the
> photo-book for printing.
>
> Again, I am rambling, but this seemed a good idea at the time...

So I for one like the idea of maybe two rating fields that would be
fairly common to all, i.e. quality and content ratings. The above
graph is 2D, so the lower left ratings are 1/1; lower right 1/5, upper
right 5/5, etc. But then for those who want other criterion beyond the
common quality/content ratings, the ability to have custom rating
fields would be neat. It would be like a tag that could be assigned a
value, perhaps with customizable number of degradations.

Sounds like this would be an interesting feature. The problem with
tags is that they are inherently binary, either the photo has the tag
or not. You could do a poor-man's version by making tags content1,
content2, etc. The only problem is that it's not as easy to filter by
a threshold like the star rating, and you would need to OR all tags
you want to display.

JDR